In his book, The Struggle for Recognition, the German Philosopher Axel Honneth remarked that people fight for change when they are on the receiving end of either social insult, disrespect or denigration.
Furthermore, and in total opposition to what would normally be familiar territory for economists, he points out that economic issues would play second fiddle in such socio-political calculus.
It is our view that the critical mass of voters that voted for change in the last general election held similar views to the one that was propounded by the German philosopher.
This is to point out that their votes were based not so much on economic calculations as on the overriding perception that the last government was ultimately guilty of violating their moral expectations.
In other words, it was not the fact that we are languishing in a cesspool of economic debt that drove the FijiFirst party across to the Opposition chambers of “the house”.
On the contrary, it was the related issues of social injustice and moral outrage among the discontent.
Allegations of deliberate harassment of political dissenters by the police, the suppression of civil liberties, the weaponisation of the disciplinary apparatus of the State, the politicisation of the civil service, the arrogant style of their leadership, suppression of group rights and personal vendettas became the hallmarks for the authoritarian viciousness displayed callously by the last regime.
Many would argue that the perceived loss of dignity, self-respect and social esteem in the general population is a direct result of their style of leadership, with its emphasis on form rather than substance.
Tragic as these maybe, they are not the reason for this opinion piece.
What is more concerning for us, at this very moment, is the recent abandonment of political duties by five key members of the Opposition in the span of three months.
All of them occupied ministerial positions in the last government.
Indeed, for students of politics, governance and jurisprudence, this would amount to an anomaly in any democracy.
What is the driving motivation behind what, in our humble opinion, is simply an abdication of duty to their country?
In other words, what kind of men and woman have we been entrusting our country and, by extension, our lives with in these last few years?
Let us start with some preliminary observations.
By every conceivable measure, there is not a single one of them that has not done well after landing a ministerial portfolio in the last government.
Irrespective from where they had worked previously, most, if not all, enjoyed a pay rise when they became ministers in the last government.
Additionally, they had power and prestige, that usually accompany such positions.
They also happen to be the leading lights in their political party – a former commander of the army, a corporate lawyer, a former university professor, an educator and a surgeon.
They lost it all in the metaphorical blink of an eye.
What happened?
Once the FijiFirst party took their seats in the Opposition benches, it began to implode.
It started with the main orchestrator within the last government – the former attorney-general.
It is our view that Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum deliberately disqualified himself from Parliament.
The reason for this is quite straightforward and, ultimately, revolves around his personal disposition to power.
He is a man who cannot play second fiddle to anyone else.
Anything less than complete control is taken as an insult for him.
The absence of his usual centre-stage position and the glamour that goes with it would have made the Opposition chambers unattractive.
It was, therefore, preferable for him to take himself out entirely rather than facing the political taunts of his opponents who are now in government.
He was absolutely stripped of the political and social power that he was so used to and deployed relentlessly against his political foes.
The daunting task of facing these foes from a position of relative weakness was too much for him.
Mr Bainimarama’s exit, on the other hand, is more complex compared to his chief lieutenant.
We believe that the former prime minister suddenly realised the enormity of the task before him without the constant guidance of Mr Sayed-Khaiyum.
His days in Parliament were numbered from that point onwards.
His personal failings would have been amplified for all to see if he had attempted to face off his inquisitors from the other side of the house – men and women – who would have been at the receiving end of his personal vindictiveness during his stint in power.
These weaknesses would have been compounded by his lack of acumen and the necessary stage skills to continue mesmerising the impressionable in Fiji in the way Mr Sayed-Khaiyum was, supposedly, renowned for.
His “rockstar” status and messianic pretensions were in danger of being ridiculed at in the largest stage of all – our Parliament.
Mr Bainimarama, given this, found it preferable to fall on his own sword.
This is to say that the spiel in Parliament that led to his suspension and ensuing resignation came out of professional frustrations and thwarted personal desires.
Indeed, for us, his so-called political gaffe and subsequent unrelenting stance was, ultimately, a face-saving measure.
Rosy Akbar resigned on medical grounds according to mainstream media.
If social media is anything to go by, she was known to be sick even before the election.
This begs the question: would she have voluntarily resigned if she had a ministerial position to hold on to and the perks that go with the
position?
Unfortunately, we will never know the answer to that one.
However, the optics surrounding her latest actions do not look good at all.
It suggests, at the very least, that self-serving interests were at play.
Mahendra Reddy, a university doctor, and Ifereimi Waqainabete, a medical doctor, following their colleagues, just simply gave up after festering in the Opposition side of the house for less than three months.
They are presumably, given their qualifications, looking for better opportunities elsewhere.
By better, we mean better than the $50,000 they were getting paid with as members of the Opposition.
If recent reports are anything to go by, the former minister for health has been appointed professor of surgery in one local university.
If our analysis is true for each one of the former ministers discussed above, then it suggests a deplorable portrait of their personal views and beliefs on good governance and democracy as well as their place in them.
It seems they have no idea of the importance of these concepts apart from what they can bring to their pockets and self-esteem.
Why is that?
Don’t they realise the important role of the Opposition in any democracy?
That without an effective Opposition, government could become its own worst enemy let alone the people’s?
Do they think that it is below them to hold government in check?
These are just some of the questions that come into our minds when we are confronted with the resignations of these former ministers.
Political analyses and social commentaries have highlighted the fact that most of the votes that FFP attained in the last election have been
“rendered redundant” with the unceremonious exits of these former members of Parliament.
As a result, the argument goes, the FijiFirst party has lost its political legitimacy and is only in Parliament, in the way they are represented, on a legal technicality.
Don’t they think that the questions above are important to them on a personal level?
Contrary to ideas peddled around the streets of Suva, the Opposition is quite critical to the working of any democratic government machinery.
They are there to curb government excesses.
They are important members of our society.
These ministers need to learn that contrary to popular opinion in Fiji, politics is not a zero-sum game where the winner gets to take all his or her winnings home.
Politics is about patient negotiations with your political rival in the hope that Fiji and its people will ultimately benefit from these personal interventions in our political landscape.
It is about patience in the face of adversity.
It is about being steadfast in whatever circumstances life throws at you knowing that these are just passing moments.
Alas, it seems that our former ministers do not appreciate this basic fact.
Such is the ignorance they have for true democracy.
They are not interested in serving people from the trenches.
They like being served.
It seems like they were just a bunch of opportunists masquerading as politicians forever trying to insert themselves in the most profitable game in town.
It is high time that we, as responsible citizens, stop electing these sorts of people into our own Parliament.
As they embark on pursuing their varying personal interests, away from the din of the madding crowd, they would do well to remember the term that the ancient Greeks, the people whose ideas gave initial form to the concept of democracy, used to define the completely private individual with – the idiot.
(* Sevanaia Sakai also contributed to this article.)
• DR TUI RAKUITA teaches in the School of Social Science at the University of Otago.
• SEVANAIA SAKAI teaches in the School of Law and Social Science at the University of the South Pacific.
The views expressed are the authors and do not reflect the views of this newspaper.
